In Plato’s dialogue the Phaedrus, the sine qua non of the educational transaction is identified as “an acquired conviction which causes us to aim at excellence.” This conviction, and the double purpose of such excellence — knowledge of the subject to be learned and knowledge of the soul that digests the subject (thus relating the academic subject to the psychological subject) — has today been almost entirely forgotten or deliberately abandoned. The culture’s memory bank has been junked and students enter on their careers — such as may still be found in our diminished world — with only a small float in their cerebral registers, living on a reduced intellectual budget. Their connection with the legitimate culture, that is, with the memorial scope and vista of our history as a civilization, has been rudely and peremptorily aborted, and replaced by an instrumental modality of instruction that is grievously lacking in substance.

The attitude of our so-called “educators” toward their profession is perhaps best described in the paradoxical phrase coined by the Hellenistic philosopher Philo of Alexandria, the nefalios methi, or “abstemious intoxication”: “abstemious” because it eschews the plenitude of genuine teaching and knowledge-based scholarship, and “intoxication” because it is besotted by the reductive paradigm of instruction it has enthusiastically adopted.

This paradigm is instantly recognizable by the contents and procedures that dominate our public school classrooms: films galore, computer simulations, audio-visual devices, “testable competencies,” PowerPoint presentations, concept maps, information transfer, virtual whiteboards, expurgated texts, true-or-false exams demanding little in the way of written formulation of ideas, and so on. Teachers are trained to emphasize method, to prepare “instructional designs,” to focus on “techniques” of transmission, to valorize process instead of matter, to generate “lesson plans” rather than lessons — “That’s the reason they’re called lessons,” remarked the Gryphon in Alice in Wonderland, “because they lessen from day to day.” Meanwhile, since they are expected to be communicators rather than preceptors, teachers are regularly shunted around the curriculum and required to teach outside their disciplines — which, be it said, they have often failed to master owing to the institutional stress placed on tactics and delivery rather than on grist and corpus. Thus the poor geography teacher becomes a worse gym instructor.

Doubtlessly, the penchant for instrumental modes of teaching has been with us since time immemorial, but in the current climate it has been exalted into a hypothetically remedial ideology and institutionalized as a pervasive method of committee-backed instruction. It is high time we became aware, then, that despite all the media hype and the inundation of formulaic pamphlets, primers, and manuals which experts, specialists, and many public school teachers have unfathomably welcomed, and the misguided policy to hire 100,000 more ill-equipped teachers, the techniques that have become so popular these days do not work. As I wrote in Education Lost: Reflections on Contemporary Pedagogical Practice, “the fundamental premise at the bottom of modern educational theory, namely that teaching is a science whose operative concepts are those of storage, dissemination and skill-replication…is faltering badly, especially in those disciplines which are not data-based.”

To avoid or at least mitigate the disaster we have brought upon ourselves, we would do well to recognize our pedagogical arrogance and to revive the sane and prudent, low-tech high-intelligence mode of operating associated with certain earlier institutions such as, for example, the Merchant Taylors’ School in mid-sixteenth century London. The founders of the school, which turned out an elite corps of graduates including the poet Edmund Spenser, confined their speculations (in the words of Elizabeth Watson in her little book on Spenser) “to the ensuring as exactly as possible that the condition of their school and its running shall be conducive to study and learning, without attempting to implement any particular syllabus, or even to insist on any theory or method of education” (italics mine). They offered their students a true, down-to-earth education rather than the cold cultivars of merely fashionable theory.

Everything considered, and allowances made for cultural and historical differences, the Merchant Taylors’ School, in the early to middle period of English pedagogy, was a far superior secondary school to anything our contemporary ideologues and planners, whose ignorance of educational history is impressively catholic, have managed to install today. We no longer teach the classics, those documents — in the words of Melville scholar and Norton anthologist Hershel Parker — that “afford the most rich, complex, aesthetic experiences…most likely to work transforming enlightenment…in all earnest young students.” On the contrary, our current methodology, pursued in a cognitive vacancy, constitutes nothing more than another pedagogical talisman which testifies only to the bankruptcy, or the magical thinking, that has overtaken the culture of education to which we unthinkingly contribute. We have long passed the time, laments Welsh poet Gillian Clarke in her new book Ice, “when the map of the earth was something we knew by/heart.” It is as if we have simply forgotten the central axiom of human development: if you know very little, you cannot do very much. Method can never be a surrogate for substance. You must work to have something there if there is ever to be something there to work with.

We are speaking of education here, but education is not only and exclusively education; it is also an expression and a symptom of the culture in general. And thus, it is not only students who are at risk, but all of us in whatever field, niche, or social category we may find ourselves. This is precisely the argument that the late president of the Czech Republic Vaclav Havel makes in his Summer Meditations, in which he stresses that the only way to fulfill the purpose and historic mandate of the schools is to eschew the production of “idiot-specialists” and “to send out into life thoughtful people capable of thinking about the wider social, historical, and philosophical implications of their specialties.” And not only of their specialties, of course, but of the social, cultural and political world in which they will be constrained to live and for which they will be held accountable.

In 1695, the Puritan divine Timothy Cruso, after whom Defoe may have titled his famous novel, wrote: “The days wherein we live are extremely evil, but we have yet a sad and doleful prospect of the next age becoming worse. … We see such crowds and swarms of young ones continually posting down to hell, and bringing up so much of hell in the midst of us…we cannot but use some Christian endeavors to open the eyes of these mad prodigals, and to fetch them home.”

Christian endeavors aside, such fears and imprecations are fashionable in every age and testify as much to the inevitable incompatibility of the generations as to the progressive regression of history. Nevertheless, I sometimes wonder if a time will not eventually come in which the apocalyptic platitude manifests as ineluctable fact, in which the fears of conservative parents are ultimately and unexpectedly realized in their refractory offspring, victims of a feckless and corrupt Academy. I suspect we may be there now.

Perhaps we can start by re-reading the Phaedrus, that is, by recognizing that the past has much to teach us and that we are not free-floating, ahistorical particles who owe nothing to the archive of our civilization. For we, too, like our progeny, will be held accountable.

I couldn’t agree more. The latest intiative that I know about threatens to include government publications that would be inserted into an ever diminishing English language curriculum. See http://clarespark.com/2013/01/05/american-fascism-and-the-future-of-english-and-american-literature/. I give links to the Common Core Standards and other pro-government sources, plus blogs that reveal the ideological turn of the teaching of American and English literature, a long-standing problem, initiated possibly by the Progressive movement.

It’s worse than you both think. Our public education system works splendidly and exactly as it was designed. A bit of history…

In 1805 Napoleon routed the Prussians at Jena causing an avalanche of Teutonic self-examination. One Berliner, Johann Gottlieb Fichte, decided the real problem was that the yeoman class–farmers and craftsmen–were too independent. He set about designing a school system that would produce “soldiers who will not disobey orders, workers who will not strike and citizens who will not revolt.”

Among his innovations were bells to mark periods (a demonstration that one’s time is not one’s own), grades (to teach that one’s work is for the approval of one’s superiors and to be rewarded intangibly and arbitrarily), rows and columns of desks (to enforce a sense of isolation within regimentation), homework (proof that the state can intrude on your personal time), absence of privacy (no place on the grounds where students can escape scrutiny in order to condition students not to expect to have any), etc.

Fichte’s capstone innovation was a patchwork curriculum of busywork that did not teach any process start to finish. This would guarantee students did not receive actual useful knowledge that could reduce their dependence on the state.

This was the Volkschule, the school for the 92 percent of mere citizens. The children of the aristocracy continued to study swordsmanship and horsemanship at the Realschule.

Five or six decades later, Horace Mann approvingly reviewed the Volkschule and determined to bring it to the U.S., where it met a frosty reception (the “little red schoolhouse” system, which had NONE of Fichte’s innovations, was popular). Giving up on pushing it to communities, he instead promoted it to state legislatures as a solution to “the immigrant problem.” It rapidly gained ground. John Dewey gave a huge Progressive nod of approval and added some features to make it more of an assembly line, and there is our public school system, only superficially changed in 110 years and turning Americans into fearful statists just as it did Germans.

Schooling today in public elementary, middle, and high schools amounts to political indoctrination from a leftist, collectivist, statist viewpoint.

Fixing the educational system is beyond the ability of any single family with kids — it’ll take far too long, and in the meantime your kids are being steadily brainwashed by the left. Vote with your feet.

Home-schooling is the best solution. If there are alternative schools in your area that meet acceptable standards for content, then use them. Otherwise, simply withdraw — the problem is way too big for you to tackle alone.

Where does all this go? Beats me. But you owe your kids a duty to do the best you can for them. And keeping them in such a mentally and morally corrosive envronment as the public schools verges on child abuse.

The problem is society-wide: http://esr.ibiblio.org/?p=260 And among all the institutions around us, the most stubborn and hard to change is the public school system. (This is quite deliberate, by the way. Lefties know that to bend the system, you have to start in the schools.) By contrast, politics are far easier to change, every couple years you get the chance to boot someone out. Not so in schools.

Get on school boards? No point. Too little influence, teachers’ unions control personnel, and the curriculum comes down from the Feds via state boards of education. You’re outnumbered on every side.

So as I say, vote with your feet and home-school your kids. There are lots of curricula available online.

Random, exactly how do you figure vouchers are being used to accomplish something illegally? Logically that would require at least one of two conditionsto be met given the larger context. Either (a) teaching religion is illegal; or (b) using funds provided by the government in this manner is illegal. Given the First Admendment and the Preamble to the Constitution neither condition can be true. As per the First Admendment all people in the US are free to believe, and therefore teach or learn, any religion of their choosing, or vice versa none at all. And since the Preamble pretty clearly states that “We the people” are the Government and the money in question is in fact our money being returned to us to engage in a legal activity of our choosing it can’t be illegal.

Just because you and some statist at Slate want it so doesn’t make it so. Please pull your head out of your nether regions and actually use the knowledge and thinking system learned in earning the degree that I assume you have given your chosen screen name. Otherwise you make our chosen profession a target of ridicule instead of respect.

Here we have an example of the trouble we re in. The union-supported Progressive movement has created the societal equivalent of an immunological system where RandomEngineer is one of the white blood cells. Constantly monitoring for anything foreign or threatening to itself and attacking with simplistic talking points meant to neutralize.

School vouchers are a great invention because they allow choice and choice nurtures competition and competition creates excellence. But this is anathema to Statists because it robs them of power and control. I would not choose to send my kids to a school that taught creationism – but that’s the point, I wouldn’t have to. As it is now we have only schools featuring RandomEngineer’s brand of indoctrination to choose from. And we have to watch helplessly while they mess up the student’s the post-school opportunities as well.

Random, exactly how do you figure vouchers are being used to accomplish something illegally?

Never once did I say this. The article writer thinks that. All I did was point out that vouchers aren’t about education quality, they’re merely the latest mechanism by the anti-evolution fundies to bypass biology instruction that doesn’t agree with their beliefs. I linked to the article for “added” info, to show that I’m not alone in the negative perception re vouchers.

School vouchers are a great invention because they allow choice and choice nurtures competition and competition creates excellence.

This is what the social cons tell you and what you want to believe, but sadly, vouchers are good merely for teaching creationism.

As for your belief and defense of vouchers, I don’t agree. If little Britney has an IQ of a mop and gets crap grades, Britney will never be a doctor; vouchers don’t fix IQ. Vouchers promise to do little more than have teachers teach what’s on a standardised test. They can’t make Britney smart. Britney will grow up and work as a waitress and get back tattoos because that’s what Britney can actually do. Meanwhile the educational system we have now — as bad as you claim it is — doesn’t negatively affect the high IQ kids who will be doctors anyway. The smart kids do what they have always done, that is, they teach themselves.

Of course the response will be that in Lake Woebegone, ALL the little children will have an above average IQ, courtesy of vouchers…

geeze — As it is now we have only schools featuring RandomEngineer’s brand of indoctrination to choose from. And we have to watch helplessly while they mess up the student’s the post-school opportunities as well.

Mess up? Sorry, never saw this one. My kids went to public school and ended up doing well on the SAT/ACT tests. Got 2 kids with science degrees, another in med school. I keep hearing about how rotten education is, yet I’ve never seen evidence that this is true. Did my kids periodically end up with some politically correct dipshits for teachers? Of course. Was this the rule? Not really. Were they clever enough to see instructor bias for what it was? Yes. Were they capable of forming their own opinions? Yes.

You must have zero respect for kids in school to think that they are all indoctrinated sheep. Or by “indoctrinated” are you really carping about the fact that their opinions may be different than yours? I expect and demand that my kids have their own opinions, many of which differ from mine.

How about you expand on this thought for me? It’s interesting. I’d like to hear more.

randomengineer: You have taken the discussion off into a tangent on the variations in student IQ. Isn’t that totally beside the point? The beef I have with the current situation is that a) it is generally ineffective across the board (although high IQ students will tend to overcome educational system deficiencies and receive special attention in one way or another)and b) it has become a vehicle for political indoctrination of the impressionable young.

As for the “mess-up” comment I was referring to the greatly reduced economic opportunity for our kids once they do get through the education system. You can blame that on vouchers if you want. Pretty soon it will seem pretty foolish to be blaming Republicans and evil profit seeking corporations when the Progressives have had almost total control of things since 2006.

And lastly, I don’t care if young people have differing opinions from mine. Hell, I had different opinions back then. What I would like is for them to be given a shot at learning basic skills and critical thinking in an unbiased environment. Our schools have become intolerant of any but the liberal, progressive, democrat way of thinking and if you can’t see that, there is no hope for you.

BTW, I am an engineer as well and as you know one of our main jobs is to identify and reject biases that might result in unworkable solutions or approaches. I’ve read as much as I can as objectively as I can about our education system. First I would say, get the Feds completely the h*ll out of it. Next, make unionization in public education illegal. Lastly, since we do need a way to help those on the bottom economic rungs, provide vouchers without strings attached. Free market systems have created so much in so many arenas for so many. Let it work in education.

And exactly what do my property taxes, etc., do? They fund a state-run voucher system for government run schools that teach what a special interest group wants to indoctrinate into students. The wing-nut teachers’ unions are given a pass on anything outside of the approved curriculum or outside of The Book, The Book being the approved manuscript for instruction and indoctrination for each course.

Personally, I think if a parent takes their student-child out of a government run school they should also be able to take their tax-funded voucher (generated at gun-point for the government school) to whatever school, home, charter, private, religious or where ever, and spend their earned monies on their choice of education. But the wing-nut statist teacher unions will have nothing of that.

I spent 24 years being indoctrinated by a broken system, and then twelve years teaching in that broken system. Our educational system excels at mediocrity. A few are fortunate to rise above The System. A precious few. Others, those that chafe at The System are hammered down, forced to conform and too often have the spirit of learning squashed as they are then left to flounder as long as they are not disruptive. Wing-nut teachers are allowed to criminally coerce their charges into participating in ideologies contrary to parent wishes, and indeed coerced into participating in ideologies contrary to the child-student beliefs.

Don’t believe me? Students are suspended for pointing their fingers like a gun. Students are suspended for talking about Hello Kitty bubble guns. And if that is not indoctrination I don’t know what is. And the criminals abusing the children are left to continue their indoctrinations. Have a ‘Christmas’ play? Can’t do that. Put the Ten Commandments in a school? Can’t do that. But the child must be indoctrinated into Alternate Life Styles, shown how condoms are put on bananas. Some parents might object to this. And what do the schools say to the parents? In terse, short terms, the parents are told to sit down and shut up. The parent does not know what is best for their child. Only a state approved wing-nut teacher can possibly know what is best for a student. Student, not child. Child-turned-student will be expected to eat what they are told to eat, according to state mandates. Child-turned-student is told what to study, according to state mandates. Child-turned-student is told when and where to become indoctrinated, according to state mandate.

Education of children in this country is an abusive criminal enterprise. Indoctrination of students, well, that seems to be working just fine. And it works because of people like you. People who fear that choice will take away this monopoly on the indoctrination of students according to your ideologies and beliefs. Look in the mirror, friend. You will see who you fear.

Pick a topic – health insurance, schools, food you eat, if you can own a gun – the left wants to force you to do what they want. Or indeed there will be consequences: a health insurance “tax” and the IRS will get you, don’t buy something with fat, salt or sugar and Bloomberg types will slap it out of your hands, no school choice – you vill go to zee closest school and you vill not complain even if zee teachers are dumb and the other kids are dangerous… (Only topic they want “choice” on is if a woman wants an abortion. Now they do NOT want you to have a choice in whether you pay for it or not.)

After our world order fully unravels (and there can be no doubt that the great unraveling is well underway), future generations will look back on our time and wonder how and why a people who had every positive opportunity and possibility within their grasp could blithely throw it all away for the meanest and lowest of all lowest common denominators; the chimera of a false “equality”.

Recently I was acquainted with a book about politics written in a foreign language. It purports to be an instructional manual on how to influence or even replace political operators, functionaries, etc. This manual is written with an appallingly bad grammar and style to the point that many paragraphs are simply incomprehensible. So far, no harm done. Just two “professors” who don’t know how to write and hold some outrageous political theories. What astonishes me is this: the writing and translating of this book was financed by an American Conservative who expects that thing is going to influence the 2016 elections even to the point to put a Conservative in the White House. This is not any ordinary Conservative since you can see him from time to time appearing in Hannity or other Fox shows. No wonder we are in the sorry state we are when a Conservative political operator thinks that a couple of mediocre authors from a far away land can develop a method to influence the US political process. That has to be the product of extremely faulty thinking.

Frequently I see Conservatives that speak, think, and act like Progressives because they have failed to educate themselves on history, philosophy, or some other important discipline. IMO if we do not re-educate ourselves we run the risk of going around trying to promote conservative ideas while resting on the foundations of a liberal education chock full of myths and wrong concepts.

Unless we start reeducating ourselves and our children in the most rigorous truth we are as gone as the intellectual classes of Nazi Germany or Stalinist Russia.

Catino;
Doesn’t this make you a little suspicious? The issue you have may be counterfeit, or a misprint, and published with the intended purpose of making the authors look ignorant. If you are familiar with the authors style, then you should recognize a resemblance in their writings.
I find many examples of this phenomenon at book sales for stores “going out of business”.

Yes. It made me a bit suspicious because the lingo is generally Marxist or rather Deconstructionist. I took the job of translating it in good faith but by the time I reached page 50 I realize the thing was too obscure to be translated properly. I also noticed that the authors were two typical liberals in their attitude: no moral substance to their arguments, the whole thing is “procedure” and a blind acceptance of the “system being what it is.” I had a bone to pick with some conceptual errors such as morals and ethics used as synonyms; and a specific paragraph where they seem to propose that morals emerge form a societal consensus. Although I am in dire need of work and I could have used the money, I had to warn the poor American chap that was footing the bill that the book was a brick and had to be re-written. Once the book is published in English I will return to this venue and write a critique. I hope that will clear the air.

This awful experience was good because it made me think of an alternative to that book. Perhaps I will write a paper describing how Conservatives are being affected by the prevailing winds in education. We must start the next Conservative Revolution right there. We must teach ourselves and others to think clearly like a Russell Kirk or a Barry Goldwater, in my modest opinion we are not doing that right now.

I was asked to translate the mess into English. I can assure you it is legit but I hope you understand my plight here: I cannot reveal the details without breaching common ethics and a specific contract. I can only give you my word of honor that the book exists, and it was published in Spanish last April. It enjoys ONE “like” in its Facebook page, and it is available on a virtual bookstore in Spanish. It does not seem to be a best seller. As for the anecdote of someone of some importance having high hopes for such book… believe me, I could not make that up.

I would agree that the purpose is ideological in the few areas where content remains under what is called the Common Core in the US. Because this is grounded in UNESCO’s view of using education globally to transform the West via cultural evolution, what is being called the Common Core in the US under Obama has parallels all over the world. Cultural evolution is the idea of usingK-12 and higher ed to change the prevailing values, attitudes, and beliefs at any given time. Do that and you change the culture.

The real problem is that UNESCO is not interested in the academic as it bolsters individuality and independence. Their own documents published right as the Berlin Wall toppled and put into effect as Transformational Outcomes Based Education over the past 20 years all over the world put the focus on new collective values and the vocational. Using all the ICT technology, not the machine shop. And for all. Thus levelling the talented.

The real struggle here is the determination to make feelings and emotions dominant via the schools. To the point of unconscious reflex. And diminish the rational conceptual mind as much as possible. In part by keeping long term memory deprived of facts. Hence the you can just look it up drive.

So there is nothing accidental about what has happened in education. In the US or anywhere else in the world. And education degrees have been changed dramatically from being about the transmission of knowledge to today being deeply grounded in implementing the Marxist theories of human development. Using different names of course but the sociology profs have kindly let that cat out of the bag. And I of course have those statements tagged and filed for proof.

And we have to talk about this to have any chance of getting back to David’s classroom of old.

I’ve been taught by some gifted teachers,caught up in their subject.A lot can be learned by an eager student from those you would consider teaching in an inferior way.Far from the ideal,but in no time period would you have all good teachers using a fool proof method.True,most fall short of what you require but at all times it comes down mostly to effort.

It seems obvious to me that it requires a harmony of effort–even Socrates’s “instamatic” method, of eliciting the knowledge quickly, out of the student’s own mind, through guiding questions, requires the closest harmony between teacher and student. And the quickest, most effective way to impart knowledge is to instill in the student the fundamental desire to read, widely and deeply — to eagerly and perennially sample the accumulated wealth of knowledge from the entire past of mankind. Personally, I saw the way things were going 30 years ago, partly from seeing computer users being ineluctably drawn into using proprietary (and limited, and limiting) software — Bill Gates’s vast fortune is founded upon the enslavement of millions to Windows. The near future must bring either mass civil disobedience, on the part of true lifelong scholars like myself, or World War III.

Yes, Harry;
I’ve found the best teachers have a method of inducing critical thinking in students by asking pertinent questions.
And Windows fanatics have learned to live with and embrace their frustrations.

You cast too small a net Cyber. In their current incarnations there isn’t a nat’s whiskers difference between the Apple Empire’s OS and the Microsoft Empires OS. Considering the fanatical love bestowed on all things Apple by the far left leaners I see something very wrong with it by association.

I know this can be an endless argument, but:
I have years of experience with both OS’s, and I can’t see where Windows has actually progressed into the functionality of Safari as far back as 1998.
I’m not a pro or a techy, this is just my practical experience gleaned from my employment, friends’ systems, and my own systems, as recent as 2 month new.
Even had a Computer Dept. Chairman at the local college tell me he found Mac’s to be more “robust”.
He wasn’t wrong.

I found the socratic method used by my law professors to be most effective in training my mind in the analytical process as it related to law. This method of teaching I am sure has application to other disciplines. The love of learning was inculcated in me by many of those marvelous teachers.

“Oooowweeeeeee! This man can string ten dollar words into sentences one has to read twice to understand!”

Mr Solway, I appreciate that you’re an educated man. But!…this is not a classroom. I wonder how many people started reading this article and simply gave up. I don’t mean to say that you have to cheapen your words or coarsen your ideas. I will say that you have to be able to communicate your ideas. Perhaps I’m the only one whose hackles rise on trying to read this but somehow I doubt it. This has to be one of the worst articles I’ve ever read on this site. It almost appears to be a submission to an educators’ journal for peer review by an earnest third year student.

So Mr. Solway should dumb down his article? Yes there were some dense sentences, but he made his point.

You are an illustration of why America is in the predicament it’s in, and your comment highlights a major disorder of our time – “quititis”.
Anything difficult is to be bypassed, unwilling to apply oneself and pay the price of learning. Fast, easy payoffs only please… spare me the effort.
I suspect that Barack Obama took the same approach: “Oooooowweeeeeeeee! This intelligence briefing is just too intense for me. What’s my tee-off time?”

“So Mr. Solway should dumb down his article? Yes there were some dense sentences, but he made his point.”
How about using a thesaurus so we don’t have to use a dictionary to read a pjmedia article?
Someone with a HS diploma would have a hard time with this writing. These days even college grads I would guess (and which is probably the point), but communication of your ideas, or point, is paramount.
If only a lawyer can understand it, why should I bother reading it? Is the author not talented (educated) enough to put complex arguements into a format the normal person can understand.

No two words have the same meaning or one of them would cease to exist. The thesaurus provides lists of words of similar meaning. The author was explaining specific concepts in a specific context. If the topic is important learn the words, it’s known as education.

Thanks for the spirited defense. I’m generally attacked by my critics for two things, especially here in the Great White North, namely my ideas and my style. I take such assaults, both verbal and institutional, as a sign that I’m on the right track. Breitbart: when you’re over the target…

Agree!! I got through it but… Take examples from Sowell and Freidman. Your ideas will reach more people if you speak to them all.
It also could be a cruel joke that shows us just how illiterate WE are for not being able to pull concepts out of heavy reading material.
Legal-ese, medical-ese, accountant-ese, are all a pain in the arse!! for us commonurs.
The joke is on us, aye Dave?

11bravo;
“Apparently”, (a $3.50 term, plus tax) you are the “anonymous” commenter above. (qualified for a refundable $1.89 for the $.02 cent contribution).
I see no “requirement” ($1.98 plus tax) in the comment guidelines, that YOU submit any response at all.
There are more than enough essays posted on the internet, that you can relate to; Possibly your own.
But; I do understand your “predicament” ($4.98 plus tax). If only more people would speak, write, think, eat, drive, talk, and wipe their butt, as “commensurate” ($6.49 plus tax) as you do, the entire world would be so much a better place to get my benefit check every month.
PLEASE “avail” ($2.49 plus tax) yourself to the “copious” ($3.09 plus tax) “resources” ($8.89 plus tax) at your “disposal” ($4.98; on sale this month!!!) at OTHER, more “convenient” ($9.99 plus tax; based on availability) “websites”. (FREE SHIPPING IF YOU REPLY IN THE NEXT 5 MINUTES WITH YOUR SECURITY CODE).NOT AVAILABLE IN STORES.

Geezer, just wondering, but do you understand the concept of communication vs. education? I’m asking that without jest as I think you fail to grasp the (purported) purpose of PJMedia. This is a communication site first, that certainly may educate, but not (primarily) an education site. If you still can’t grasp the concept please review the Gettysburg Address vs. Bill Clinton’s testimony in the Monica Lewinsky “trial” (while not intended to be educational it was certainly conducted in a similar manner). Mr. Solway certainly makes valid arguments, but he does so in a manner that fails to reach the largest possible audience (communicate) because in large part he is choosing to use the language and manner of education (typically, and best, targeted at smaller groups who share some level of common interest and knowledge).

Good God!!!
Okay, “midnight”, et al;
MR. SOLWAY, SIR;
CAN YOU PLEASE PROVIDE AN EXTERNAL LINK TO ALL YOUR ESSAYS THAT HAS THEM WRITTEN IN SIMPLE WORDS THAT DOESN’T CAUSE THESE TENDER LITTLE INTELLECTS TO GET HEADACHES FROM TRYING TO THINK.
THEY REALLY CONSIDER YOUR USE OF POETIC AND CLASSIC TERMINOLOGY TO BE OFFENSIVE, AND EXCLUSIVE.

WARNING: WARNING: WARNING:
Dr. Victor Davis Hanson uses language that has been known to cause migraines in delicate intellects.

Would a “Warning Label”, posted in bold red print, at the head of every essay that uses poetic & classic terminology suit you babies?
And you better make sure you never try to buy a bottle of wine at any other place than “7-11″.

Got to love the irony here of readers who supposedly will be outraged at today’s allegedly lowered educational standards whining because the essay is too difficult to understand.;-)

Yes, Solway is infatuated with $5 words. Understanding them is not the problem, but the way they are layered speaks of ostentation, rather than clarity. At least he did have the perspicacity to point out that education was being decried and the world going to hell, back in the 1600′s. That lent some appropriate perspective here, but he claims that the difference is… that now…it is really happening? Really? One would have to already think so to concur with this article, since it essentially assertion, rather than proving anything.

If football comes down to blocking and tackling, then skills in reading and writing, my area of some knowledge, come down to…. reading and writing. Not pretending to read and write, but actually doing it, and being held accountable.

You highlight a clear example of why the GOP and many of its pride today, will never increase its party to anybody but the small crowd who self-profess superior intellect. They speak over and around the majority of citizens and then when they do speak to a person, its done in a most vile attack, generally, professing how stupid the the person is, or dressing them down as retards for not agreeing with them.

Thank you! I’ll take your advise for what its worth coming from a high school classroom clown who disrespected his teachers, disrupted classes and was expelled from class and a high school dropout — by your own admissions.

Hell, I questioned teachers all the time, but since I could multi-task, I also made it a point to complete my missions. You, sir, as one could infer by your posts here, lurched off into….whatever, and somehow that fits in with a PJM denizen. I guess that you are just more of a rebel than I am. As for your cause, if you ever had one, who knows?

Dwight:
You could MULTITASK way back then? I am so impressed. You must have been a unrecognized prodigy.
I sincerely hope you get your just rewards.

I am amazed at the number of complaints about Mr. Solways writing style, since it appears there is an overwhelming number of readers that are unidimensional readers.
Oh, by the way; Mr. Solway IS a recognized authority on this topic.
Wikipedia: David Solway (born 8 December 1941) is a Canadian poet, educational theorist, travel writer and literary critic of Jewish descent.

My search of Wikipedia hasn’t produced any items of mention on any of the critics here, nor any for you.
And don’t waste you time telling me there isn’t any page for “Cybergeezer”. But, YOU can create one and give yourself the credit! You’d be immortalized!!!!
And I would not want to threaten any of you with actually reading any poetry. But, there are quotes about poetry you can search that will not inconvenience your unidimensional reading comprehension.

Better writers can get their intent across without sounding pretentious. Read any of the sci-fi by physicist Gregory Benford and he gets far deeper concepts than what Solway is on about across seemingly effortlessly. He even knows how to use short sentences.

Solway’s gibberish seems suited to the types who equate dense prose and obscure wording with big thoughts. As near as I can tell from a quick scan the article was variant #4978 that the education of yesteryear is/was superior to today’s education — i.e. not exactly deep stuff.

The Progressive / Public Service Union T-cell returns to pile on this threat to their control of our education system. Yes, that is exactly what the author meant . . . let’s get back to six grades in one class where the older kids can help the young-uns with readin’ and rithmetic.

In today’s version however, we would have a union janitor, a diversity VP, an NEA monitor, a State curriculum compliance officer, a school marm union representative and other assorted bureaucrats crowded around the metal detector at the school house entrance.

I’m SO HAPPY to see you write this, Mr. Solway.
I mocked several of my worthless teachers in high school, in front of the class. Needless to say, I was expelled from their classes.
I felt so abused in an auditorium classroom, with TV’s for instruction, that I disrupted the classes in every clandestine way I could. Shooting paper clips into the metal exhaust fan, and whistling in a high pitch that mimicked squeaking machinery.

I ended up quitting high school, since I could see their inculcation had no real world value, other than a diploma, which I could acquire through correspondence, while I was employed, or in a Tech School, learning a REAL skill.
One teacher surprised me, by agreeing with my method of protest, but not allowing me to disrupt his class. I realized I misjudged him for the typical sloth most other teachers were in that school. He was the only one I apologized to, since, he showed me that he did understand he was teaching INDIVIDUAL students.

If my kids ever had trouble with a teacher, I coached them with what action to take, and complained to the school board about the teachers attitude and behavior. I helped them with their homework to help them get through the class with as little stress as possible. At that time, you couldn’t have a petulant juvenile in charge of a classroom like you have in most class rooms today.
These days, the roles have reversed; Teachers have to accept abuse from their students with the threat of discipline
or reprisal from students, parents, and/or the administration for throttling disruptive behavior.
Most “teachers”, these days, are nothing but licensed day care workers, keeping a low profile, biding their time for retirement.
A good education is expensive, but a meager education is more costly.

I’m right with ya, Cybergeezer! 85% of classroom teachers are bad communicators, 35% incredibly so! And PhD university education dept profs top the “boring, terrible communicator” list.
What’s a good communicator? Check out Fortune 500 trainers. Visit Disney “University.” As a student, you’ll actually stay awake!
Content unfortunately will always take second place to delivery! University education depts need to weed out the poor communicators and not continue to award education degrees to those who do well only on written tests.
A large percentage of teachers have no business being in a classroom and should have been “outed” during their college years!

Also coming to all American schools is PBIS (Positive Behavior Interventions anD Supports): a pre-fab discipline system that sounds good, and is implemented using staff committees so that the teachers think that they are designing or controlling the process. But ultimately they have to follow directives from administration, that, simply put, amount to “thug hugging:” ignoring outrageous behavior while making issues out of trivial things.

PBIS has come out of the Office of Special Education Programs and all data on behavior incidents are tracked in a database. DOJ is also behind this, using the data on discipline to “prove” racism where it may or may not exist. Administrators are therefore NOT writing-up or disciplining minority-group students and finding ways to discipline majority kids more to keep their discipline numbers “balanced.”

I am glad you brought up PBIS. And the fact that it is being applied to ALL students as behavioral monitoring, not just problem students. It is being implemented classroom wide as a so-called Response to Intervention. I got the ruling the day it came out and wrote a story on it. http://www.invisibleserfscollar.com/how-social-and-emotional-learning-as-the-primary-focus-is-coming-in-all-the-windows/ . The title refers to the fact that this social and emotional learning emphasis governs the actual Common Core implementation in the classroom even though it is not on most people’s radar screen. They still tend to believe Common Core is about content and not changing values. Thank goodness the Canadians are pushing the same materials but they acknowledge it is about obtaining common collectivist values.

The cited materials for PBIS are the same as for the Positive School Climate Executive Order of July 28, 2012. David-they are also the Canadian cited materials. They all tend to come from the National Center for Emotional Education that now bills itself as the National School Climate Center. A lot of Amitai Etzioni’s Communitarian work as well as Richard Layard’s Happiness research. The latter is also big on the UN’s radar and comes from the UK.

As a middle school principal said to me no realizing I was more than a parent: “What you feel is now more important than what you know.”

Their connection with the legitimate culture, that is, with the memorial scope and vista of our history as a civilization, has been rudely and peremptorily aborted, and replaced by an instrumental modality of instruction that is grievously lacking in substance.

All the better to turn you into malleable robots, My Dear Watson.

Not to mention that teachers in America don’t have nearly the depth and breadth of immersion into and grasp of their subject as in days of yore.

You can’t inculcate what you don’t possess.

I just heard of another school district (in California, like some administrators in Georgia) changing test scores after the fact in order to make their charges look smarter.

Their connection with the legitimate culture, that is, with the memorial scope and vista of our history as a civilization, has been rudely and peremptorily aborted, and replaced by an instrumental modality of instruction that is grievously lacking in substance.

All the better to turn you into malleable robots, My Dear Watson.

Besides which, teachers in America don’t have nearly the depth and breadth of immersion into and grasp of their subject as in days of yore.

You can’t inculcate what you don’t possess.

To avoid or at least mitigate the disaster we have brought upon ourselves, we would do well to recognize our pedagogical arrogance and to revive the sane and prudent, low-tech high-intelligence mode of operating associated with certain earlier institutions…

But that would interfere with the agenda.

You must work to have something there if there is ever to be something there to work with.

Today’s inculcators of “knowledge” like that there’s no there there.

Just as in today’s corridors of power in Washington DC, if there were a there there, that crowd would be laughed out of the building.

Nevertheless, I sometimes wonder if a time will not eventually come in which the apocalyptic platitude manifests as ineluctable fact, in which the fears of conservative parents are ultimately and unexpectedly realized in their refractory offspring, victims of a feckless and corrupt Academy. I suspect we may be there now.

I have to agree with Anonymous-5:05 to some degree. Mr Solway frequently sounds as if he’s channeling Talcot Parsons. A few concrete examples here and there would make his columns clearer, more readable, and more enjoyable.

If I had either I’d be happy to share it with you. I have a vision problem that makes reading a chore. And when I start to encounter words that I don’t know and must look up, I start to wonder if this is the best way to spend minutes of my rapidly shrinking future. I want to know more about the world, the future, and the people who are shaping it. When I look up words that are virtual synonyms of those I already know, I start skimming the article to get to THE POINT. And if THE POINT turns out to be something I already know, then I move on to look for something that I don’t already know. I don’t have that much time left, so I have to use it well. If only I’d known that 50 years ago.

Well Judenlieber, Sir or Madame;
Your moniker is associated with Holocaust essays, art, and other comments at various sites.
Current technology accommodates most maladies, especially vision, if your auditory sense is not impaired.
I have acquaintances that have listened to many audio books while traveling in their cars. I find it too distracting, and damaging to a pleasant drive, and unjust to a good book.
Most cell phones have voice note/memo capability these days; Even iPods. Or there is the dedicated pocket dictation machines.
Voice recognition software is becoming cutting edge and widely available, though can be pricey.
You may still have a chance to fulfill that aspiration.
Best of luck.

Thanks for the suggestions. I’ve listened to books on CD while driving, which is an excellent way to stay awake on a long Interstate drive, but not a good idea in heavy, stop and go traffic. I also watch the History Channel,the Science Channel,the National Geographic Channel, and several other reality-based sources. And the Web, of course. The vision problem I have involves a large number of “floaters”, which means I have to continually shift my eyes back and forth to see the words clearly. I’ve been told that this can be cured by removing the fluid from the eyes and replacing with a substitute. One of the few things that I Really don’t want to know is what it’s like to have a needle suck in my eye.

So, Judenlieber;
I resubmit my original question.
Perhaps they can do both eyes at once. You know, like ear piercing, because the eyes are close together. ( I jest ).
A quick internet search found laser surgery for that condition.
Unless you are totally at the mercy of ObamaCare, this procedure should be affordable and compensated by insurance.

“Socrates affirms that he would rather be as he is, knowing that he knows nothing, than to be inflated by a false sense of his own great wisdom. Thus, he concludes, he truly is wiser than other men because he does not think he knows what he does not know.”

If only the pompous asses pervading all strata of American society, culture & government might have such an insight.

My biggest fear, which i see on display every day, is that to many of the American parents just don’t give a hoot. They would rather have the state educate the kids, warehouse them and feed them than they themselves step away from the 2 careers and American idol.

Yes, some parents home school or are very involved BUT too few of them are to make an impact in our society. Unless many more people “wake up” to whats going on in this countries education system we are in serious trouble.

I believe the goal is to get the word out to the average parent (Here is nice but preaching to the choir). How to go about doing this? Not really sure but i would love to see some articles on HOW to get the word to these parents!

Articles on here about what is wrong and needs doing are fine but we need more articles on how the rest of this can communicate to the masses ( not just here and other conservative. or how more of us can help spread the word…..

Nailed it. Wise old saying: Half of finding a solution is correctly identifying the problem. The problem is not the schools. It isn’t reasonable to expect the public schools to be staffed with magical, super nanny, teachers. Schools must hire from the same defective gene pool as any other business, the same gene pool that gives rise to the 80/20 rule.

The problem is: Rather than demanding that those who make babies act responsibly and raise them, there has been an implicit transfer of the responsibility for raising kids to the public schools. But the public schools are not staffed and equipped to raise kids.

Either we stop encouraging and subsidizing irresponsible baby making, or we redesign schools to raise kids in addition to teaching them something. But then, demanding responsible baby making amounts a racist, sexist, this-ist, that-ist war on every possible social group except white guys.

Yes, steve; We are already in “serious trouble” since We have masses of illiterate juveniles and young adults on the dole and throughout the government and private workforce. (e.g. “Occupy” movement and their supporting media).
They occupy up to the highest positions in Our government, and are shackling America with their ignorant, audacious, impudent, and presumptuous regulations that continue to constrict Our Constitutional liberties.
And, these pathetic individuals are PARENTS, to boot, contaminating the community with their recalcitrant offspring.

Here is what is going on, and has been going on for decades: The administrators and teachers have been trying all these things, and they don’t work, and they don’t know why. They are puzzled.

So they develop jargon-based programs to demonstrate that they are Doing Something. It involves taking one or two ordinary ideas and dresses them up in fancy language. Everyone (administrators, politicians, journalists and sometimes the teachers) embraces the new jargon, which allows for studies, grants, new curricula, workshops — it gives everyone Something To Do and Something to Talk About. For to save your career, you need to learn this jargon-based reform.

It gives everyone a fig leaf so they can look forward and say see, we are reforming? This was demonstrated to increase test scores x and y and we are embracing it. The language, which switches every few years, takes a while to translate. There are a few trojan horses thrown in, but no matter what, it takes a long time to catch up to the conversation.

The reform almost always involves taking some aspect of an ordinary teaching and learning experience, labeling it with a scientific or programmatic sounding term, and then emphasizing that over other things.

There is also the issue of pedagogical research. Researchers need to do something, and future professors need to publish, and so past research (and past methods) must be somehow devalued, undervalued, or otherwise tweaked so that people can publish. This research feeds the Reform Machine above. And round and round it goes.

Thus, drill and kill is bad and yields to student-center education, which in turns yields to reinforcement intervals, which sure sounds like drill and kill BUT IT’S NOT DAMMIT AND STOP SAYING THAT! Three potatoes become “manipulatives.” Etc., etc.

The other thing that happens is that ordinary human experience is labeled abstractly and in a weird way, e.g., it’s like, duh, there is a social and emotional aspect of learning, but do we need to create theories around it that make this idea seem impenetrable? The answer, because of the research and education industries need to Do Something (because what they are doing isn’t working), is Yes. It keeps them off the streets and puts food on the table. You don’t want your local superintendent knocking off the local 7-11, do you? DO YOU? Better she focus on getting the school budget passed.

Now, I began by saying that administrators and the rest of the politicized educational industry and politicians don’t know what is wrong. That is an interesting question. Since human nature is the same and the only new stuff is technology, we really should know the answer by now. We also should know how to teach by now. I mean, really. We’ve been doing it for at least 4,000 years.

Granted, reform is always somewhat necessary, as teaching methods can become ossified and we need to shake things up a bit, but that’s all. A bit.

So what is going wrong? I don’t know. My guess is we would need to strip away layers of careerist, cya, politicized bullshit and talk about real issues. Those would be the cultural milieu education is expected to occur in; the families; the students’ behavioral habits and peer attitudes; and finally, the schools themselves. Perhaps there are more fundamental grounds, too, but I’m unable to articulate them at this time. I think there is something to the idea that our education system was designed for a time when teaching was one of only a few career choices for women — so we used to have supersmart, super high-achieving teachers who today become CEOs. Obviously, I’m not discussing returning to those days, but if it’s an issue, it needs to be addressed (that is, if we’re expecting more out of teachers today than is reasonable, we need to say so.)

But these things are difficult if not impossible to discuss and resolve in our society; it’s easier to just say what we need is more money to make sure each student has a computer in school, or we’ve got this fancy new program, or this new textbook. Let sleeping cans of worms lie.

It’s actually amazing that any education occurs at all, now that I think of it. And it occurs because there are a lot of good teachers, parents and administrators out there getting the job done despite the BS.

Right on, right on… “Gives everyone Something to Do”… those that do, do; those who cannot do, teach: AND those who cannot teach, teach the teachers. So much in education is education academics run amok.

For a completely different look at the basic problems of universal public education, you might want to read the first third or so of Albert Jay Nock’s book, Memoirs of a Superfluous Man. He was around and taking notes when all this universal education stuff started at the beginning of the 20th century, and his take on it is well worth reading now that we have had a century or so of experience to match up against his observations.

Yep, I think you pretty much describe the education biznness. It is a product of each new generation, using their “initiative” to come up with new solutions and new jargon. In fact a lot of our problems in guvment come from people using “initiative” to raise themselves on the public nickel. Most of the folks at PJM are so alienated from the education biznness, and also so distant from it, that their mutterings and horror stories simply won’t have any effect.

Solway writes: “In 1695, the Puritan divine Timothy Cruso, after whom Defoe may have titled his famous novel, wrote: “The days wherein we live are extremely evil, but we have yet a sad and doleful prospect of the next age becoming worse. … We see such crowds and swarms of young ones continually posting down to hell, and bringing up so much of hell in the midst of us…we cannot but use some Christian endeavors to open the eyes of these mad prodigals, and to fetch them home.”

Christian endeavors aside, such fears and imprecations are fashionable in every age and testify as much to the inevitable incompatibility of the generations as to the progressive regression of history.”

Well, there’s an admission! Each generation would love to do things ITS way, hence the fascination with NEW things, which we/they imagine to be unique to our/their generation.

Almost everyone wants more security and more stuff. Even Tea Party folks do; they are outraged though, at certain other groups that are getting stuff.

An uneducated populace is more easily controlled. People who understand a little physics, chemistry, and materials science, cannot be fed an absurd story like the official 9-11 conspiracy theory. The author’s masterful use of syntax is an important part of the article, for he thereby shows what is missing from education. Words are the symbols we use to formulate our thoughts. Try to bring a concept into your mind, without words accompanying that concept. If one can control the meanings of words, and which words are taught, they can control the thought processes of those using the words. That is precisely what Eric Blair aka George Orwell was telling us when he described Newspeak. My favorite example is a two-word pair, freedom fighter and terrorist. The Jews who bombed British hospitals and barracks in Palestine in the late ’40′s were called terrorists by the British. Today, those same Jewish terrorists are called freedom fighters in our rewritten histories. Newspeak in action. Look how the MSM went into overdrive after Sandy Hook, with the key operative phrase being assault rifle. Assault rifles kill kiddies, endlessly droned by the MSM propagandists. Read Charlotte Thomson Iserbyt for the history of this “Deliberate Dumbing Down of America). What we see is the model of the Medieval Church in action: keep the masses uneducated to better control them.

“What we see is the model of the Medieval Church in action: keep the masses uneducated to better control them.”

And there you go repeating an old canard. Explain to me how the uneducated masses of medieval Christendom were able to sustain enough engineers, accountants, masons, architects, artists, etc. to build the cathedrals of Europe. Paradise it was not but the Church never had the kind of control that the media has over “modern” or “post modern” man.

the future is robots and drones. and, an army of the poor, eager to fight for or against anything dear leader directs.
education is no longer about how to process problems and find solutions. it happened when the word “challenge” became the permanent substitute for “problem”. there is no solution to challenges except overcoming them. there are, however, plenty of ideas and a variety of solutions to problems. that is, if the brain works vigorously at it and is properly educated to think things through. why would they want us to learn how to do that.

Funny how the presumed great philosophers of time are used by some to identify and attempt to solve problems. Identifying the problems of todays education, is not buried deep in the writings of some past philosopher. The educational problems of today are ALL manufactured problems by modern day special interest groups. To find the solutions to correct the problems one doesn’t have to dig deep in some philosophers writings. We have modern days points of reference to what worked very well before all the special interest groups perpetual experimentations. The three R-R-R’s and leave professionally prepared classroom teachers alone to teach the durn stuff! Get back to the content that raised up the greatest educated society in American history post WWII and before the 70′s. Get back to a two-track K12 system. Get rid of that ridiculous inclusion crap. Get back to a standard of displine and consequences. Make parents criminally and civilly responsible to assist in their kids education requirements. Kick ALL education special interest groups to the curb. Increase private sector enterprise into the education equation. Return ALL children of the military back to schools on military bases. Minimize social studies in elementary and middle schools increasing english, vocabulary, reading, composition writing, math and science. Increase trades tracks and work experience in high schools. Return education to local districts, preferably independent districts and away from state and nationalized education bureaucrats. Return too teacher and student performance standards based textbook and teacher formualted testing. Return too cover-to-cover content standards. Send emotionally impaired students to a special track apart from the mainstream classrooms.

Today, especially around military installtions, and inter-cities, theres a huge problem with transient students and a complete lack of parenting, discipline and essentially children abandoned in the home. I don’t know what you do in this situation but they are tremendously disruptive to classrom education efforts.

I think Hillary’s rant,”What does it matter” at rhe recent congressional heaaring sort of summarizes the attitude toward education. Leaving out the perceived wrongs by unions, public schools are major victims of political correctness and the recent victimiation of the little girl whose grandfather tore a gun shape for her points out how close we are becoming a government run state. The kid who reported her throwing the “gun” in the wastebasket could have come straight out of the Hitler Youth who were encouraged to report anyone who strayed from the Nazi line. In schools which are supposedly trying to stop bullying, this is ridiculous. The teacher who ridiculed her had absolutely no sense of proportion but she probably was complimented.

I suspect that part of our problem is that we, as a society, have lived too fat and complacent for too long. Making ourselves smarter is no longer a survival imperative like it once was, and so we no longer thirst for knowledge because we no longer perceive the life or death importance it has to us. God forbid we ever fall into a situation where knowledge once again becomes a life or death survival issue because so many people will die.

aharris;
You have indicated a critical detail.
The “knowledge” many rely upon, these days, is internet based.
Libraries are having trouble maintaining their resources for many reasons; Mainly monetary.
When the internet resources are shut down by the government, where do We go for our Our primary source of information?
There are alternatives. And some of these alternatives are governed by the same regime that will shut down the internet resources.
Certain frequencies of radio communication are not regulated and may become essential.

I have a Ph.D in a STEM field, so believe when I say that I know what it’s like to be EBAR (Educated beyond all recognition). Looking back on it all, I think all anyone needs to know for ordinary middle class life is to read and write as well as do arithmetic up to the point of knowing how to handle percentages. Anything else amounts to government mandated makework for the educational establishment. So, a modest “back to the future” proposal, why not stop government required universal schooling at the 5th or 6th grade, after checking that in fact all the students have learned to read, write, and do percentages. Those who want to learn more can, but they have to volunteer for it, and those who don’t get to enter the work force or spend their free time learning privately from parents or other guardians.

(Don’t talk to me about child-labor laws; I’m not interested. Hollywood somehow keeps on finding real children for its movies and advertisements, and if that’s not “child labor” I don’t know what is. Presumably they are not abused or much worse for the experience. That suggests current child-labor laws are at best a massive exercise in social hypocrisy and at worst a sort of sham, enforced only if the employer has no political clout.)

One of the purposes of our K-12 educational system is to keep kids off the street and off the unemployment roles. Makes politicians and our justice system look good. And parents, especially those that are single, like it too.

If only our society could get back too that message! Social political and history philosophers have never created or contributed a single tangible thing to society. Mankind survives on the tangibles — not the intangibles!

Here in North Carolina they are flirting with virtual charter schools, and I am flirting with having my two boys “attend” one of them from junior high on. It seems a great solution for families who want to keep things home-based, but would like their children to have, you know, teachers.

But if the feds nationalize a progressive curriculum in the liberal arts, even this will not represent an escape.

Does Waldorf indeed do so? I do not know very much about it, but it has always sounded to me like it is big on children enjoying their learning and exploring artistry connected to it, but not a lot of emphasis on acquiring a great deal of core knowledge, as Mr. Solway seems to suggest is necessary.

Sitting in the patent office archives and going through all the old patents is an education worth more than any books an intelllectual elite can ever give you.

Most of this nations ulitilitarian designs were by people who had little formal education. Coming up to the mid 20th century most of the nations early milionairs were of high school or less, educations. few intellectual philosophers and historians have ever contributed anything tangible to any society. Mankind exists on tangible things — not the intangibles!

Most of this nations ulitilitarian designs were by people who had little formal education.

Meaningless. At one level a lack of formal education is obvious since when you invent something new, it isn’t that which you could read up about. You can only get educated on that which is already known.

On the other hand spend your time looking at the meaningful worthwhile patents of the past 50 years and you’ll find a lot of expertise in the subject areas, i.e. it generally ain’t high school dropouts inventing scanning tunneling microscopy. High school dropouts tend to be the inventors of engine hoists and safety pins.

On the other hand my old friend — few things are actually “new” as people might think. About 90% of all patents through the years are ‘improvement’ patents; improving what somebody before improved and somebody else improved and on down the line.

“scanning tunneling microscopy” – Though the normal disputes of the time, Zacharias Jansen, of Holland, around 1595, is creditied as inventing the first microscope and everybody else has only improved on it. Nearly impossible to think of anything that is a legitimately ‘new’ product unless, one wonders off into pharmacology and some other medical area devices.

My main point was that intellectual philosophers and historians have never contributed anything tangible to any society’s benefit. My next point was simply that, those before had the same kinds of innovative minds with little formal educations as does some of those today with extensive formal educations.

Okay, now you can club me and chain me to the wall of some dominatrix’s dungeon!

Zeke — On the other hand my old friend — few things are actually “new” as people might think.

That’s the nothing new under the sun argument but embiggened. I view this as wrong. Da Vinci had a drawing of a triangular thing that was intended as a parachute, unworkable of course. The ability to imagine some sort of way to slow a fall in the air isn’t remarkable, and it’s not really invention. Modern skyfall apparatus is fairly sophisticated and really doesn’t have anything in common with the Da Vinci picture. Jules Verne imagined interplanetary flight, yet the hardware that will do the job will have sod all to do with Verne. Vague ideas are easy. Anybody can do it. Implementation is hard. Few can do it.

So sure, if your criteria for claiming nothing new is to compare implementation with “gee it might be cool to do X” then you win. Meanwhile indulge me and look up scanning tunneling microsopy, which has more in common with doorbell buzzers than dead dutch dudes. Reminds me: a fun way to see piezo effects is to chew a wintergreen certs breath mint in the dark. Damn thing sparks as it compresses.

Just saying that, the little old german who invented the combustion engine — well, its still around with how many piles of improvements issued to date? The little old german who invented the first reminant of a computer — well, its still around and how many piles of improvments have been made to it throught time? The list is endless! Oh, hey! How about this one? Windmills made as an energy source for grinding grain and pumping water (500-900 A.D.)? And I think for electricity and a few other things also, long before the green energy folks come alone.

What is most remarkable (and ironic) is that none of the comments here talk about Mr. Solway’s obvious MIS-reading of the Phaedrus. On the surface, a large portion of the Phaedrus is a discourse about homsexual love, the passion that ancient Greek men had for Greek youth. Plato teases out distinctions between pure physical passion and a deeper more soulful love. But getting past the surface, the Phaedrus is about Rhetoric, not education. Phaedrus represents Plato’s attack on the Sophists generally, and on Isocrates in particular (there is an exchange at the end of the Phaedrus where Socrates sarcastically praises Isocrates.)

Plato is critical of the Sophists’ teaching only as a means to a larger point. Plato calls a number of Sophists out by name–but the point is not about how Sophists teach, impure teaching methods generally, or about how folks should teach in an ideal world, but about the product of this teaching which is “rhetoric.” Indeed, were we to apply Plato’s lessons from Phaedrus to the dialogue in the comments here we would call out those who toss around epithets like “Marist”, “Statist,” “Deconstruction,” “Progressive,” or other intellectual short hand like “Dewey.” Rhetoric as described by Plato is illegitimate because it misleads by suppressing the truth.

Every discussion cannot proceed from first principles, but every discussion can be principled.

For those interested classics, Aristotle offers a fairer study of proper rhetoric in his Rhetoric. Isocrates is the hack that Plato made him out to be.